Talk:Hadith terminology

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hadith terminology article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Islam: Hadith Mid‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Hadith task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Hadith#Different schools|Different branches of Islam]] The anchor (#Different schools) has been deleted by other users before.
[[Hadith studies#Sanad and matn|isnād]] The anchor (Sanad and matn) has been deleted.
[[Hadith studies#Sanad and matan|chain of narration]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Recent edits[edit]

I have removed several edits by User:Humaliwalay who added ^{[citation needed]} templates to already referenced material twice. I added additional references in addition to removing those templates. This user has now added POV statements to referenced material which I identified as vandalism. The sources cited simply do not mention that the viewpoint expressed is limited to Sunnis and to add this statement while making it appear that this is included in those references is deceptive and therefore vandalism. This page details the terminology used by hadith scholars and is not a forum for Shiite propaganda.Supertouch (talk) 12:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all the citation cited is unreliable, and secondly is not neutral, those citations are from Sunni Historians, also its a known fact that Shiites disagree with Sahih Bukhari and Muslim being considered authentic after Quran. Since this is an Islam related topic and deals with Islam related contents. We have to highlight if Sahih Bukhari and other Sunni books are authentic then by whom because their authenticity and neutrality is disputed by Shiites. Shiite Islam is a branch of Islam. - Humaliwalay (talk) 07:10, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sources I have cited on this page are without a doubt reliable; an unreliable source is NOT one that you disagree with. As for these sources not being neutral, if that were true than every article citing Sunni sources would be unacceptable which is absurd. It is simply unnecessary and unrealistic for every article on Wikipedia that mentions something about Islam to mention "but the Shiite say..."Supertouch (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all do not use sectarian wordings like pointing me as Shiite or something. Secondly, I never said that I disagree with Sunni sources or I trust Shiite one. As stated earlier Islam is a community with millions of followers of various sects within. Here the Name of the article is Hadith terminology so it deals with Hadith and its books accepted within Islam. If Bukhari and Muslim books are authentic after Quraan as per Sunni belief then no one disagrees but you have to mention that its acdcepted by the Sunnis, because it does not have the 100% consensus of Muslims. - Humaliwalay (talk) 05:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point which is not at all difficult to understand. You are adding material before a citation which is simply not mentioned in that citation. Also, it was you who introduced "sectarian wordings" into this page, not me. I am reverting your edits once again. Please do not drag this once stable page into an edit war.Supertouch (talk) 13:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]